|
3883 Evidence Code section 822, which in an eminent domain or inverse condemnation proceeding prohibits the admission of evidence of the capitalized value of the income or rental from any property other than that being valued is for the protection of the owner, rather than for the protection of the public entity taking the realty; during closing argument in an eminent domain proceeding insistence by the attorney for the city that the jury either choose between the value offered by its expert and the value offered by the landowner's expert precluded subsequent argument by the city that the jury's choice of the higher value offered by the landowner's expert led to an excessive verdict.CitationHURWITZ v CITY OF ORANGE (City Shenanigans) 122 CA4 825 [See: EvC 822; Peo exrel Dept v Andresen 193 CA3 1144]
|
|
